Decision Date: 07/31/95 Archive Date:
08/03/95
DOCKET NO. 93-16 916 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin
THE ISSUES
1. Entitlement to service connection for a low back
disability.
2. Entitlement to service connection for a circulatory
disability of the right leg and foot.
3. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot
disability claimed as fallen arches.
4. Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder
disability.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
Appellant
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
James A. Pritchett, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from May 1966 to April
1968.This appeal arises from a July 1991 decision by the
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
Regional Office (RO) that denied service connection for low
back, right leg and foot, bilateral foot and right shoulder
disabilities. The Board notes that the veteran had
originally claimed an earlier effective date for a 10
percent evaluation for his service-connected residuals of a
fracture of the right great toe. However, this issue was
withdrawn by the veteran during the personal hearing before
a member of the Board in July 1993.
REMAND
The veteran is service-connected for a right knee
disability, a right great toe disability and tinea pedis.
The right knee and right great toe disabilities were the
result of a bus accident in February 1968. The veteran
testified that he has been treated by private physicians for
his various disabilities. The claims file contains letters
and reports of examinations but does not contain any
treatment records. A letter dated in March 1991 from
Timothy P. Wolter, D.C., states that he had treated the
veteran for back, leg and foot problems since June 1988. A
letter dated in December 1991 from James M. Abens, D.C.
states that in his opinion the veteran's claimed low back,
circulatory and shoulder disabilities are, in essence,
secondary to his service-connected disabilities.
The veteran's service medical records may be incomplete.
There is no record of the reported accident or the
subsequent diagnosis and treatment.
Since the veteran's claim is well grounded, the VA has a
duty to assist in the development of facts pertinent to his
claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103
(1994). Accordingly, the case is remanded to the RO for the
following:
1. After obtaining authorization from the veteran, the RO
should obtain copies of all private treatment records not
already a part of the file from June 1988 to present.
2. The RO should obtain copies of any VA outpatient
treatment records not already part of the claims file from
June 1988 to present.
3. The RO should obtain the veteran's complete service
medical records, particularly those records from the 106th
General Hospital, APO SF 96503, concerning treatment of the
veteran after the reported bus accident February 1968. It
should be noted that clinical records may be filed
separately from an individuals records and all appropriate
searches should be conducted. The RO should also request
any personnel records or reports of investigation which
would have any bearing on the accident.
4. The RO should schedule the veteran for a VA special
orthopedic examination to determine the nature and severity
of any low back and right shoulder impairment. All
necessary tests and studies should be accomplished, and all
clinical manifestations should be reported in detail. The
examiner should specifically comment on the etiology of any
low back and right shoulder disabilities and the
relationship, if any, between the disabilities and any
documented injuries suffered by the veteran during service
or disability residual thereto. The claims file must be
made available to the examiner prior to the examination.
5. The RO should schedule the veteran for a VA special
podiatry examination to determine the severity and extent of
any bilateral foot impairment. All necessary tests and
studies should be accomplished, and all clinical
manifestations should be reported in detail. The examiner
should specifically comment on the etiology of any foot
disabilities and the relationship, if any between the
disabilities and any documented injuries suffered by the
veteran during service or disability residual thereto. The
claims file must be made available to the examiner prior to
the examination.
6. The RO should schedule the veteran for a VA peripheral
vascular examination to determine the nature and etiology of
his claimed circulatory impairment of the right leg and
foot. All necessary tests and studies should be
accomplished, and all clinical manifestations should be
reported in detail. The examiner should specifically
comment on the etiology of any circulatory disorders found
and the relationship, if any between the disabilities and
any documented injuries suffered by the veteran during
service or disability residual thereto. The claims file
must be made available to the examiner prior to the
examination.
After completion of the above development, the veteran's
claim should be further reviewed. If the determination is
adverse, the veteran and his representative should be
provided with a supplemental statement of the case and given
the appropriate opportunity to respond thereto. Thereafter,
the claims file, including the above requested evidence,
should be returned to this Board for appellate review, if in
order. No action is required by the veteran until he
receives further notice.
The purpose of this remand is to procure clarifying data.
The Board intimates no opinion, either legal or factual, as
to the ultimate disposition of the appeal.
ROBERT D. PHILIPP
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures
Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740,
___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board
to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a
determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an
individual member of the Board.
(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United
States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38
C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1994).
- 2 -